4.7 Article

Polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS Liberte stent in de novo lesions - The pivotal TAXUS ATLAS trial

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 49, Issue 16, Pages 1676-1683

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.01.069

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives The goal of this research was to assess non-inferiority of the next-generation TAXUS Liberte stent (Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, Massachusetts) versus the TAXUS Express stent (Boston Scientific Corp.). Background The introduction of drug-eluting stents (DES) has shifted clinical practice towards more complex lesion subsets, prompting the need for more deliverable DES. TAXUS Liberte was designed to combine the established polymer-based, paclitaxel-elution TAXUS technology with the more advanced Liberte stent platform. Methods The TAXUS ATLAS study is a global, prospective, single-arm trial evaluating outcomes in de novo coronary lesions visually estimated to be 10 to 28 mm in length in vessels 2.5 to 4.0 mm in diameter. The control group is an entry-criteria-matched population of TAXUS Express patients from the TAXUS IV and V trials. The primary end point is non-inferiority of TAXUS liberte versus TAXUS Express for 9-month target vessel revascularization. Results Despite similar inclusion criteria, quantitative coronary angiography-determined baseline lesion characteristics were significantly more complex for TAXUS Liberte than TAXUS Express. The primary non-inferiority end point was met with the 1-sided 95% confidence bound of 2.98% less than the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 3% (p - 0.0487). Conclusions Despite the treatment of more complex lesions with TAXUS Liberte, the primary end point was met, demonstrating that TAXUS Liberte is non-inferior to TAXUS Express. The successful transfer of the proven TAXUS technology to the more advanced TAXUS Liberte platform was demonstrated.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available